[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [rrg] moving towards recommendation: the current plan

From: Brian E Carpenter <brian.e.carpenter at gmail.com>
To: menth at informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de
Cc: rrg at irtf.org
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 11:24:29 +1300
In-reply-to: <4B0106CD.7030608 at informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de>
References: <D4C14156-AA5C-453F-9DDE-94F7E79B2D17 at CS.UCLA.EDU> <4B0106CD.7030608 at informatik.uni-wuerzburg.de>

On 2009-11-16 21:01, Michael Menth wrote:

> if NAT66 is an option

Can you define "NAT66" precisely?

The only precise proposal I am aware of is
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-mrw-behave-nat66
(which I should stress is *not* an IETF WG document,
despite its name). That is a stateless, non-reversible
NAT.

   Brian

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [rrg] moving towards recommendation: the current plan
  - From: Michael Menth

References:
- [rrg] moving towards recommendation: the current plan
  - From: Lixia Zhang
- Re: [rrg] moving towards recommendation: the current plan
  - From: Michael Menth

Prev by Date: Re: [rrg] moving towards recommendation: the current plan
Next by Date: Re: [rrg] moving towards recommendation: the current plan
Previous by thread: Re: [rrg] moving towards recommendation: the current plan
Next by thread: Re: [rrg] moving towards recommendation: the current plan
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.